Supreme Court Judge Strength Raised to 38 via Presidential Ordinance
Source:The Hindu ↗
Why It Matters
The development touches upon core constitutional provisions regarding the Union Judiciary (Article 124) and the President's ordinance-making power (Article 123). UPSC frequently asks about the respective jurisdictions of Parliament and the Executive, and the exact constitutional mechanism to increase Supreme Court judge strength has been a past Prelims question. It also highlights the chronic issue of judicial pendency relevant for GS2 Mains.
Summary
President Droupadi Murmu has promulgated an ordinance amending the Supreme Court (Number of Judges) Act, 1956, to increase the maximum sanctioned strength of Supreme Court judges from 34 to 38, including the Chief Justice of India. The ordinance was issued as Parliament is not currently in session, leveraging the President's legislative powers under Article 123. The expansion in judicial strength is intended to tackle the mounting pendency of cases, which exceeds 81,000 in the apex court. Originally, Article 124(1) of the Constitution fixed the strength at eight (CJI + 7 judges) and empowered Parliament to increase this number by law, which has been done progressively over the decades.
Key Points
- President Droupadi Murmu promulgated the Supreme Court (Number of Judges) Amendment Ordinance, 2025 to increase the maximum number of Supreme Court judges.
- The sanctioned strength of Supreme Court judges has been increased from 34 to 38 (including the Chief Justice of India).
- The move was effectuated via an ordinance because Parliament is not in session, demonstrating the executive's use of Article 123 to make immediate legislative changes.
- The increase aims to address the massive backlog of cases in the Supreme Court, which currently has over 81,000 pending cases.
- Under Article 124(1) of the Constitution, Parliament is vested with the power to determine the number of Supreme Court judges by law, which it executes by amending the 1956 Act.
Important Terms
Supreme Court (Number of Judges) Amendment Ordinance, 2026
A 2026 presidential order increasing the Supreme Court's sanctioned strength to 38 judges. It allows immediate expansion while Parliament is in recess, requiring subsequent legislative approval within six weeks of reassembly.
UPSC context
GS Paper II: Separation of Powers and Executive-Judiciary relations. Tests understanding of ordinance-making powers in judicial administration.
Supreme Court (Number of Judges) Act, 1956
The statutory framework enabling Parliament to determine the maximum number of judges in India's apex court. It has been amended periodically since 1956 to scale the judiciary with rising caseloads.
UPSC context
GS Paper II: Statutory provisions. Tests knowledge of how Parliament exercises its constitutional mandate to regulate the judiciary.
Article 124 (Constitution of India)
The constitutional provision establishing the Supreme Court of India. It prescribes the original judge strength (CJI + 7) and explicitly empowers Parliament to increase this number via law.
UPSC context
GS Paper II: Indian Polity. Fundamental for questions on judicial appointments, qualifications, and the structural evolution of the Supreme Court.
Article 123 (Constitution of India)
The article granting the President power to promulgate ordinances during parliamentary recess. Such measures have the same force as Acts of Parliament but are temporary unless approved by the legislature.
UPSC context
GS Paper II: Union Executive. Tests the "extraordinary" legislative powers of the President and the constitutional checks on executive law-making.
Pendency of Cases
The volume of unresolved legal matters currently awaiting adjudication. In the Supreme Court, this backlog (exceeding 81,000 cases) is the primary driver for increasing judicial sanctioned strength.
UPSC context
GS Paper II: Judicial Reforms. Critical for analysis of "Ease of Justice" and administrative hurdles in the Indian legal system.
Supreme Court of India
The highest judicial forum and final court of appeal under the Indian Constitution. It holds original, appellate, and advisory jurisdictions and ensures the uniform application of law across India.
UPSC context
GS Paper II: Structure and Functioning of the Judiciary. Essential for understanding the apex level of the integrated judicial system.
Prelims Trap
"The Constitution empowers the President of India to determine and increase the strength of Supreme Court judges."
Article 124(1) empowers Parliament, not the President, to increase SC judge strength. The President only determines High Court judge strength (Art 216). Here, the President simply promulgated an ordinance on Parliament's behalf.
Static Concepts Connected
How is the strength of judges determined for the Supreme Court vs High Courts?
- Supreme Court: Regulated by Parliament via ordinary law under Article 124(1) (e.g., SC Number of Judges Act, 1956).
- High Courts: Determined solely by the President of India under Article 216, varying based on the specific workload of each High Court.
What are the scope and limits of the Ordinance-making power (Article 123)?
- Legislative parity: It is co-extensive with Parliament's legislative power. An ordinance can amend or repeal an existing Act but cannot amend the Constitution.
- Temporal limits: Must be approved by Parliament within 6 weeks of its reassembly; otherwise, it ceases to operate. Maximum possible life is ~7.5 months.
Cross-Topic Patterns
Judicial Pendency & Structural Reforms
Increasing judge strength addresses symptoms but not the root of 81,000+ pending cases, linking directly to Mains GS-II debates on creating regional Supreme Court benches or a National Court of Appeal.
Ordinance Route for Institutional Change
Highlights executive agility using Article 123 to alter judicial infrastructure. Similar to the Tribunal Reforms Ordinance, it shows the executive using legislative gaps to push institutional changes.
A 2026 multi-statement question will likely contrast who fixes Supreme Court strength (Parliament) versus High Court strength (President).
Linked PYQs · 4
Linked PYQs · 4
- 2025PrelimsGS1
With reference to the Indian polity, consider the following statements : I. An Ordinance can amend any Central Act. II. An Ordinance can abridge a Fundamental Right. III. An Ordinance can come into effect from a back date. Which of the statements given above are correct?
- 2022MainsGS2
Discuss the essential conditions for exercise of the legislative powers by the Governor. Discuss the legality of re-promulgation of ordinances by the Governor without placing them before the Legislature.
- 2015MainsGS2
Resorting to ordinances has always raised concern on violation of the spirit of separation of powers doctrine. While noting the rationales justifying the power to promulgate ordinances, analyze whether the decisions of the Supreme Court on the issue have further facilitated resorting to this power. Should the power to promulgate ordinances be repealed?
- 2014PrelimsGS1
The power to increase the number of judges in the Supreme Court of India is vested in
